Mr. Speaker, when it comes to protecting the interests of the energy sector and the people who work in it, we take no lessons from the Harper Conservatives, because they failed to diversify our non-U.S. global market and failed to build a single pipeline in 10 years to get our resources to non-U.S. markets. We are working hard and will continue to work hard to ensure that our resources get to the global market.

Mr. Speaker, four pipelines. That is what the former Conservative government did, unlike those guys on that side of the House.

Bill C-69, the carbon tax, the tanker traffic bans are all unmistakable signs of a government that is hostile to the future growth of the energy sector. There is no doubt that the no-more-pipelines bill, Bill C-69, is a direct attack on Albertans.

The provincial NDP and the Prime Minister have punished hard-working Albertans enough.

When will the Minister of Natural Resources, who is from Edmonton, finally intervene and kill the bill?

Mr. Speaker, when the Harper Conservatives formed government in 2006, 99% of Alberta's oil was shipped to the United States. When it got kicked out of office in 2015, 99% of Alberta's oil was still shipped to the United States. That is their failed decade, their decade of inaction in protecting Alberta's interests.

We are working hard to ensure that we get it right to build the pipelines, by looking after the environment and, at the same time, making sure that we are consulting with indigenous communities in a meaningful way. That is the right path forward.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Pontiac for his question and for everything he has done to protect the environment and to fight climate change in the past ten years.

Canadians know that pollution comes at a cost. We are seeing its impact across the country, including in the riding of Pontiac. We have a plan. We said that we would put a price on what we do not want, meaning pollution, to get what we do want. We want cleaner air and less greenhouse gas emissions. We want a healthy planet for our children and grandchildren.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve to feel safe and secure when they use their smart phones. However, the government has refused to ban Communist Chinese government-built technology from our 5G network. The 5G rollout will bring faster speeds, but it will also bring less security unless the government listens to our allies and bans Huawei.

David LamettiLiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Innovation

Mr. Speaker, our government is open to global investment because it creates middle-class jobs. It helps grow our economy.

When it comes to telecommunications, we know that Canadians would like to see improvements in coverage and price, and we are committed to that. The 5G network is an emerging technology that has the potential to meet the explosion in consumer and industrial demand.

As regards the participation of any participant in our 5G networks, we will listen to the advice of our national security advisers. We will never, ever compromise our national security.

Gary AnandasangareeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Multiculturalism (Multiculturalism), Lib.

Mr. Speaker, Canada is an open and diverse country, but there are still real challenges for many people in this country.

Throughout our history and even today, there are many people and communities who experience systemic racism, oppression and discrimination, preventing them from fully participating in our society.

These experiences are still felt by many Canadians, and now we can and must do better. That is why we are engaging communities across the country and people with lived experiences to modernize our approach and to develop concrete solutions to these problems. That is why we are undertaking these consultations. As we speak right now, our Minister of Canadian Heritage and Multiculturalism is in one of those sessions.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this month, the government announced that it was maintaining its financial contributions to UNRWA for the next two years. This organization has been beset by issues of neutrality with respect to its educational programs in the West Bank and Gaza, which is deeply concerning to many of my constituents in York Centre and many others who have contacted me.

Can the Minister of International Development update the House on the status of this contribution and what steps the government is taking to ensure UNRWA's neutrality and accountability?

Mr. Speaker, our funding for UNRWA is vital for the humanitarian needs in the region, and it is the same amount we have provided over the last two years. UNRWA has refocused its neutrality-related activities, like inspection and teacher training, which would not be done without Canada's re-engagement.

In the West Bank, I met with the Palestinian prime minister and the minister of education, and made our concerns clear about inappropriate content in PA textbooks. Our commitment to neutrality and due diligence is an essential condition of Canada's support to UNRWA.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Prime Minister tried to explain why he made so many concessions to the Americans on supply management. He said, and I quote, “The changes to market access in this agreement are similar to those in the TPP”.

In other words, the Prime Minister is saying that we did it once, so we can do it again. Wow, what a skilful negotiator.

The Prime Minister needs to understand that concessions plus concessions means twice as many concessions. The Liberals do not know how to count—or how to negotiate.

Why are dairy, egg and poultry farmers always the ones paying twice for the Liberals' failures?

Mr. Speaker, I can assure my hon. colleague, and I am sure he is also fully aware, that we are the party that implemented supply management and we are the government that protected it. My hon. colleague is also aware that when the negotiations started, the American government indicated quite clearly that it was going to end supply management, but we as a government protected it.

We understand there has been an impact on our farmers and we will make sure they are fully and fairly compensated for their loss. We have supported, and will continue to support, our agricultural sector.

Mr. Speaker, “talking through one's hat” is a figure of speech. “Taking someone for a fool” is a figure of speech. However, the $1-billion price tag for cancelling a contract to sell arms to Saudi Arabia is not a figure of speech.

Does the Prime Minister take us for fools, or is he talking through his hat when he invents numbers to get out of cancelling deals with Saudi Arabia?

Mr. Speaker, our government strongly condemns the horrible murder of Jamal Khashoggi and is deeply concerned by reports on the participation of Saudi officials.

Our government is working with our allies to consider a number of options. We are actively reviewing existing export permits to Saudi Arabia. We strongly expect that Canadian exports be used in a way that is in line with our foreign affairs policy, and, of course, that fully respects human rights.

We have frozen export permits in the past, when we had reason to do so, and we will certainly consider that in the future.

Mr. Speaker, the truth is that the Prime Minister wants to keep selling arms. Raif Badawi's flogging sentence will not stop Canada from doing business, nor will the jailing of women who stand up for their rights, the killing of civilians in Yemen or the assassination of a journalist in a consulate.

What more does this government need to stop selling arms to this vile country? Maybe what it really needs is a spine.

Mr. Speaker, our government strongly condemns the heinous murder of Jamal Khashoggi and is deeply concerned by reports on the participation of Saudi officials. We strongly demand and expect that Canadian arms exports be used in a way that fully respects human rights. That is why our government is committed to a stronger and more rigorous arms export system and, of course, to the Arms Trade Treaty, in which we have been actively involved the entire time of the term of this government. As the Prime Minister said today, we are actively reviewing existing export permits to Saudi Arabia.

Mr. Speaker, the Champlain Bridge project is facing further delays. There is no way the new bridge will be open by December 21. The Canadian government refuses to guarantee a date. All projects have deadlines.

How is it that the Canadian government could impose a deadline on Quebec and the municipalities to legalize pot, yet it is incapable of setting a deadline to open the Champlain Bridge?

Marco MendicinoParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, Lib.

Mr. Speaker, we will deliver on our commitment to build a new toll-free Champlain Bridge. We are proud to be building a bridge that will last 125 years and will improve the quality of life of families in the Montreal region. The structure will be finished by the end of December, but some of the finishing touches, including paving, will have to be put off until next spring. We look forward to opening the bridge to traffic in June 2019 at the latest.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 83(1), I wish to table a notice of a ways and means motion to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 27, 2018, and other measures.

Pursuant to Standing Order 83(2), I ask that an order of the day be designated for consideration of the motion.

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to raise this point of order earlier. I did not mean to interrupt the Thursday question.

The level of heckling in this place, and I have mentioned this before, has become unbearable. I am not able to hear the Minister of Environment's answers, even though I have an earpiece.

I have a lot of criticisms of aspects of the government's climate plan too, but I would ask my friends on the Conservative benches to please show some restraint so we can hear the answers in this place.